Anything else subverts the entire basis of money.
I think you just identified the motive.
Hey guys - you are in my TOP-20 bitcoin theorists. Both. Considering this, the latest replies have been lame.
I have presented a mechanism that may dethrone Bitcoin without asking the majority, the exact same way as it has always happened during monetary transformations in the history (leaving the majority holding the bag),
and the same way as Bitcoin gained its valuation, which you and I are not ashamed to enjoy.
I am interested in hearing analytical criticism that could invalidate the theory.
What I hear instead is moral criticism that
the entire basis of money is subverted if such happens.
This isn't a moral criticism, but a practical one, as argued in the post. Stores of value can change, but this cannot be a
fast process as that contravenes the very definition of "store of value." Not unless it absolutely has to happen (facing catastrophe), as I also mentioned.
Well, again, there is no fast process at work here. <0.1% of the store-of-value from gold, fiat, etc. has shifted to Bitcoin. In fact the real number considering all store-of-value asset classes is probably far less than 0.1% but that's an easy number to use. If 0.2% moves to some other cryptocoin next year that will still be an
extremely slow process, but Bitcoin will likely be left behind at that point.